In a significant ruling that factored in diplomatic realities, the Allahabad High Court has dismissed the bail application of a Chinese national accused of serious forgery and illegal stay in India. Justice Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal underscored the absence of an extradition treaty between India and China as a pivotal reason, stating the court could not ignore the relationship between the two nations while deciding the plea.
The Court's Rationale: Security and Diplomatic Considerations
Justice Deshwal, in his order dated November 19, pointed to Section 57(11) of the Evidence Act, which mandates courts to take judicial notice of hostilities between India and any other state. While not declaring hostilities, the court used this provision to contextually weigh the bilateral relationship. The judge expressed concern that if released, the applicant, Xue Fei alias Koei, might flee the country illegally, just as a co-accused, Tansong Dorji, had done and remains untraceable.
The prosecution, represented by government advocates R P S Chauhan and Rupak Chaubey, had vehemently opposed the bail. They argued that Fei was the "kingpin" of illegal activities involving the extraction of mobile chips and processors from scrap and sending them to China. They emphasized that with no extradition treaty in place, securing his return for trial would be impossible if he fled to China.
Details of the Alleged Crimes and Investigation
The case stems from an FIR lodged at Gautam Buddha Nagar Police Station in 2022. Xue Fei was accused of forging an Indian passport and an Aadhaar card in the name of Laakpa Sherpa to stay illegally in India. Investigations revealed he had also tampered with his visa extension, fraudulently altering its validity from 2020 to 2022 after it had already expired.
Police raids at a flat in Noida and a five-star hotel in Gurugram led to the recovery of the forged documents. The prosecution alleged that Fei was involved in illegal business through shell companies like HTZN Pvt Ltd and Tianshang Renjian Pvt Ltd, siphoning money out of India, partly via cryptocurrency purchases. While the chargesheet did not explicitly charge him for fund siphoning, the court noted his indirect involvement in an economic offence threatening India's financial interests.
Defense Arguments and Final Verdict
Fei's counsel, including Abhishek Chauhan and Amir Siddiqui, argued that their client was falsely implicated based on co-accused statements. They highlighted that Fei had been in jail since June 14, 2022, and with only 9 out of 76 witnesses examined, the trial would be protracted, justifying bail.
However, the High Court was not convinced. It referenced a prior order dismissing bail for six co-accused and agreed with the prosecution's fears of flight risk. The bench concluded that the case diary contained prima facie evidence of forgery and illegal activities constituting an economic offence. Therefore, considering the lack of an India-China extradition treaty and the potential threat to national economic security, the court denied Xue Fei any relief, keeping him in judicial custody as the trial proceeds.
